by Gevorg Mirzayan
[REGNUM] On the morning of May 30, Moscow was attacked by Ukrainian drones. Bloggers wrote that two or three dozen drones took part in the raid. However, in fact, there were many times fewer drones.
"Eight aircraft-type unmanned aerial vehicles were involved in the attack. All enemy drones are hit. Three of them were suppressed by electronic warfare, lost control and deviated from their intended targets. Another five unmanned aerial vehicles were shot down by the Pantsir-S anti-aircraft missile and gun system in the Moscow region," the Defense Ministry said in a statement.
Despite the fact that this attack did not cause any serious damage (with the exception of several broken windows and burning spots on the houses where the drones got out of control), the Western media paid maximum attention to what happened in Moscow. Moreover, the media coverage of this Ukrainian attempted terrorist attack was built on the basis of several key theses.
INEQUALITY AND INSOLENCE
The first thesis is the disproportionate blows. In fact, we are talking about an attack by Ukrainian drones on civilian objects in the Russian capital. And the West, which blamed Russia for such attacks, faced an unpleasant fork. If Moscow is being criticized for attacks on Kiev (which are carried out exclusively on military targets, and only fragments of downed drones or flying Ukrainian air defense missiles fall on civilian houses), then Kiev will also have to be criticized for attacks on Moscow, right?
This is where the thesis about disproportion, about the disproportion of blows, came in handy.
The drone attack rocked Moscow early Tuesday morning. This attack caused only minor damage, but forced the evacuation of people, because for the first time in the entire war, residential buildings were hit in the capital. At the same time, the Kremlin continued its relentless bombardment of Kiev, making its third raid in the last 24 hours. — In the Ukrainian capital, burned-out cars, windows and debris littered the street near a building where apartments were destroyed.
In Moscow, only a few broken windows and charred outer walls were visible. At the same time, the affected buildings were quickly repaired and painted.
"Compared to Kiev, where, according to official information, as a result of a large wave of drone attacks on Wednesday night, one more person was killed and several others were injured, Moscow got off lightly," according to the German publication Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
Everyone else writes about the same, devoting considerable space in their articles about the strike on Moscow to a story about how allegedly “brutal” the strikes on objects in Kiev were. So, they say, it is impossible to accuse the Ukrainian authorities of trying to strike at Moscow, since these strikes are "justified."
The second thesis is the audacity of the attack. Drone strikes shocked the Russian capital.
Thus, the media demonstrate to everyone (and, above all, to their readers, at the expense of which the Western governments actually finance the military operations of the Kyiv regime) the ability of Ukraine to continue to effectively resist the Russian army. The ability to inflict asymmetric strikes on Russia and continue hostilities. Why Ukraine, respectively, needs new weapons and cash tranches.
"Attacks on Moscow could also mean that Ukraine, without admitting it, is using new ways and means to confuse the enemy and limit Russia's planning capabilities. They, too, can be seen as part of the preparation for the offensive," says the German Suddeutsche Zeitung.
Yes, it would seem, what kind of ability are we talking about, if we compare Russian and Ukrainian combat capabilities? Any supply of weapons will only somewhat delay the inevitable defeat of Kiev, which even European Commissioner for Foreign Policy Josep Borrell ( who says that he is “not particularly optimistic” about further hostilities) is already very thickly hinting at. However, here the media includes the third and fourth thesis.
WEAKNESS AND AWARENESS OF WEAKNESS
The third is about the "weakness" of the Russian armed forces, which the current strikes allegedly confirmed. The BBC, citing its experts, that Russian radars are unable to detect drones.
"Shame on the Russian Armed Forces," the German Zeit titled its article. Western publications write that this terrorist attack (like the drone attack on the Kremlin, as well as the attacks by Ukrainian saboteurs on the Belgorod and Bryansk regions) supposedly shows that the Russian army is a colossus with feet of clay, that it is unable to defeat Ukraine in the current high-tech war.
The fourth thesis is that drone attacks bring the myth of the weakness of the Russian army right into the brain of the Russian population. The one who used to believe in his own security.
"Despite Kyiv's denials, the attack on Moscow shows that Ukraine and its supporters are intent on bringing the war right to the doorstep of Russian citizens. Signals greater readiness for hybrid attacks," writes The Washington Post . "For the first time, residents of the Russian capital are facing the immediate consequences of the brutal fighting that their country is waging."
Yes, reality refutes this thesis, because all the drones were either shot down or strayed off course. And Vladimir Putin considers this result only "satisfactory".
"The air defense system of Moscow worked normally, satisfactorily, although there is something to work on ... In general, it is clear what needs to be done to seal the air defense of the capital, and we will do it," the president said.
However, the West rests on the psychological, not the military component. Seeks to intimidate.
"Such attacks, having no sense from a military point of view, apparently, are directed exclusively against the civilian population in order to sow panic among civilians," the Russian Foreign Ministry agrees with this thesis.
And panic is needed in order to change people's attitude towards SVO.
"The war in Ukraine was largely perceived by the Russian public as something far away, but attacks on Moscow could change that perception. And perhaps even jeopardize public support for Mr. Putin's actions in what the Kremlin has called a "special military operation," according to The New York Times.
Why don't they adopt a law recognizing Ukraine as a terrorist state?
Moreover, we are talking not only about ordinary people (whose support is critically important for the authorities as part of the course taken to maintain a long-term self-defense system, up to the solution of all the tasks set), but also about the elites.
"The suburbs in the west of Moscow, where the residences of President Putin (meaning Novo-Ogaryovo. - Approx. IA Regnum ) and other representatives of the Russian elite are located, were hit," writes the BBC .
Thus, they say, Kiev shows both to the elites their own vulnerability, and to the population the fact that the government cannot protect even itself, even Muscovites - how, they say, can it then protect ordinary residents of the same Belgorod and Bryansk regions? Therefore, they say, the inhabitants of these regions should demand an early cessation of hostilities and not pay attention to the words of Ukrainian officials about the need for foreign occupation of the Belgorod and Bryansk regions.
We ARE ALREADY STARTING
Finally, the fifth thesis designates the current attack as a prologue to something big.
"This was almost certainly a prelude to a major escalation in hostilities," writes The Washington Post. "These attacks on Russia could serve as a pretext for Mr. Putin to escalate the war. For example, to strike at key government buildings in Kiev and attempt to behead the Ukrainian government," says The New York Times .
The problem, however, is that these strikes are already happening.
President Vladimir Putin made it clear that the drone attack was linked to Russian strikes on decision-making centers in Ukraine.
"This category also includes the headquarters of the military intelligence of Ukraine, which was hit two or three days ago," the Russian president explained. Apparently, we are talking about a strike on the military facility of the GUR on Rybalsky Island.
"With the beginning of the air raid, the center’s personnel descended into the shelter, but the Russian Aerospace Forces used a missile with a penetrating warhead, which pierced the building through and through, penetrated the foundation and exploded, destroying the shelter, where at that moment there were up to a hundred officers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and civilian personnel, including twenty foreign military from the USA and Great Britain, who interacted between the Center and similar Western headquarters," writes the well-known Russian military expert Vladislav Shurygin.
But still, the Western media are right in their last thesis - the strikes are indeed a prologue to the intensification of hostilities. What Putin himself hinted at. “They provoke us to mirror actions. Let's see what to do with it," the Russian leader said.